ARCHIVED FORUM -- March 2012 to February 2022READ ONLY FORUM
This is the second Archived Forum which was active between 1st March 2012 and 23rd February 2022
moxxey:Thanks. Sadly I'm not convinced the Avant will better the 7-55. I agree with the others that the picture and audio quality of the 7-55 cannot be bettered, as a TV, apart from via OLED. Avant isn't really an upgrade, in those departments (although it might be in others). But, the only downside of the 7-55 for me is the size. It's fine if you want a TV the size and weight of a small van in your living room. It's simply too cumbersome-looking for me. I don't want such a beast to dominate. The Avant is slicker-looking, particularly with the speaker up.
Although I find the new Avant a very fine TV, who has now, an excellent price setting from B&O. But my finding is, it has indeed no better or worse picture for everyday use compared to other sets. Maybe B & O better chose a different name, I find it in no sense a revelation in tv-terms if compared to the original Avant back in those days.
Do I need those new 4K technology? Well back in time, I had a black and white TV, and then came the color TV. I did not feel at that time I missed something and kept enjoying years of my black and white TV. Till the lamps disappear and the transistor came in.
Marketing has a major impact on new products, and the increase of all new technology is only the result of the desire of companies to earn much money. 4K is today nothing, but it will be for sure something tomorrow. We know it's tempting to buy the latest as soon as it is available. But sometimes it's better just to wait until things are settled. And in my feeling 'this is such a moment'. I am not saying "That's all we really need" as Bill Gates once did with his 640KB memory claim. So who am I to question the usefulness of 4K video.
So would I buy one now? My darkest site says Yes, because I am a human and in this fast changing world I also want to make use of the latest technology. But my sober side decide that a TV-set has to be also part of the interior and this model would not fit perfectly into it.
The new remote : It looks expensive and is build with quality, but when I close my eyes it feels cheap in the hand. As a nineties Philips remote. A bit more weight would do it...
"Believe nothing you read and only half of what you see, let your ears tell you the truth."
http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/
i rest my case
mawheele: Not sure why not. Next gen panel and next gen picture engine. I'm sure when you get yours delivered you'll be equally convinced.
Not sure why not. Next gen panel and next gen picture engine. I'm sure when you get yours delivered you'll be equally convinced.
Next gen? I've never heard anything so daft (and I'm getting the TV!). In what way is it 'next gen'? And where's this 'next gen' picture engine? Sounds like you've been indoctrinated by your dealer :)
The simple fact is, regular TV is supplied in 720p or 1080i. This has to be scaled up to the Avant's 2160 panel. This leads to pixelation. The Avant panel isn't 'next gen'. It's just 4K, which is fine if you push out a 4K or perhaps 1080P picture, where it only needs to be doubled. For regular TV the picture quality will be much *worse*, as the pixels need to be almost quadrupled to fit the dimensions of the 4K panel. Why on earth did you think that it has a 'next gen' picture engine simply as it has a 4K panel?
I guarantee you that regular HD TV, in 720p/1080i will look better on the BV7-55. If you tell me otherwise, you're making it up.
Interesting read for sure. Not sure I agree with the chart which is subjective. If we used his same basis of calculation then none of us would see the difference with retina displays on tablets and phones.
Moxxey - Not sure what is daft. Its simple - BV7 products were based on a Beosystem 3 chassis that started life in 2006 and was upgraded through its life. The V1, 11 and Avant are all based on a digital picture engine also called BeoSystem 4. The version in the Avant is an update on that in the V1 and 11.
I'd agree SD TV is not great, but no worse than on a 1080P of the same size. Enjoy your Avant.
mawheele: Interesting read for sure. Not sure I agree with the chart which is subjective. If we used his same basis of calculation then none of us would see the difference with retina displays on tablets and phones.
The chart is based on pixel size and at what distance it subtends an angle at which human visual resolution can no longer distinguish the size of the pixel. The limits of the human eye, like the human ear, are well known. And you look at a Retina display much much closer.
One thing is you have to separate the variables, often in computer displays like the Retina, in addition to smaller pixel size there are improvements in number of colors renderable, and contrast/brightness limits. That's why things like the Panasonic ZT panels get rated a much better television than the best 4k sets on the market now, there is a lot more to making a stunning TV picture than pixel size, in fact it's pretty far down the list. Black levels/contrast/shadow detail, color accuracy, gray scale tracking, are all more important than number of pixels. And they are all things that, in general, LCD sets, regardless of backlighting approach, do worse at then plasmas or OLEDs.
This is the same thing as back in the 70s when they discovered that by slapping huge amounts of negative global feedback on amplifiers you could achieve incredibly miniscule THD measurements, at the expense of huge amounts of intermodulation distortion that was indeed audible, when the human ear is remarkably immune to THD. So, in pursuit of a marketing based performance spec, you got audibly worse products. In pursuit of 4k, an attempt mainly to keep churning the video market so people will keep buying more and newer sets, you get visibly worse products than if they stuck with 1080p and went for good contrast and such. At least 3D didn't hurt the sets overall performance.
I suspect it's easier and cheaper to pump out a mediocre 4k panel using a mature, if not stellar performing, LCD technology than it is to actually produce a panel that has great performance in the areas that count most. Look at the prices for the best plasmas and even the best full LED illuminated, local dimming LCDs (which still don't equal plasma performance).
I can fully understand why B&O felt the need to jump on the 4k bandwagon, especially after being lambasted for decades for not keeping up with modern technology. But if you want a truly stunning TV, as good as the Avant is, go buy a leftover BV12ng, that uses Panasonics best plasma glass.
Jeff
I'm afraid I'm recovering from the BeoVirus.
moxxey:I guarantee you that regular HD TV, in 720p/1080i will look better on the BV7-55. If you tell me otherwise, you're making it up.
I can tell you it looks absolutely amazing on my Mk 1 BV9 too. SD is also a joy to watch, which is a good thing considering 99% of what I do watch is broadcast that way! 720p & 1080i/p HD is close to stunning. Can't see any problems with motion at all and the only criticism (if I was that concerned over it) would be that blacks are on the dark grey side, but not noticeable to my eyes when in full screen (or Format 3) and considering it is a 2007 set amazing I think. So happy with this TV. Finally I have found the right set for displaying the best of all content. Paired with BL9s, picture/audio performance and aesthetically, it doesn't get any better, at least for me.
B&O products are V1-32, BS2, H95, E8 and an Essence remote.11-46 now replaced with Sony A90J 65”, Sony HT-A9, Sony UBP-X800M2 and Sony SRS-NS7.
Your bv9 and the bv7 -55 mk2 were the last of the take no prisioners bno tv tradition
The modern stuff is crap in comparison
This is a good read too: Good read here!
While I can see where 4K would be a benefit for a very large projector, such as in a real movie theater, I have to say that when I go to the movie at my local cinema, seeing the pixels is not something I notice. I tend to sit mid hall, maybe in the front row you'd notice it. But, what I do notice when comparing it to my home experience, which is a 65 inch Panasonic VT series set, is while the image is larger and more enveloping, the picture quality is noticeably worse, mainly in things like black level and contrast, and overall brightness of the bright scenes.
Last night I was watching Penny Dreadful, a Victorian horror series, and it is a program that really demands a lot of a display, it's dark and brooding and with poor black levels it would look terrible. Not only do you need deep blacks, a panel needs to display various shades of dark gray accurately without smashing everything into black, shadow detail is critical to see what's going in in a lot of scenes. Also watched a BluRay of Casino Royale (both shows starred Eva Green), and was again reminded of just how good 1080p can be, the disc looked stunning. The other DVD we watched, standard 480p upconverted by the Oppo player, was of The Adams Family, and while it looked quite good, very watchable, after having viewed a BluRay right before the shortcomings were obvious. Still was good looking, but not exceptional like the BluRay was.
Another very good BluRay to evaluate displays with is the latest Bond flick, Skyfall, the night scenes in Chinese cities are just amazing, perhaps the best night photography I've seen in a movie. An excellent disc to evaluate TVs with. Another good one is my long time standard for this, Blade Runner.
When I get the chance to go look at an Avant I'm going to take a couple of discs over and see what I think. My nearest dealer is almost 2 hours away by highway.
Shall I get a Bluray player with upscale to 4k, or will the Avant itself do the upscale from a non upscaling BR player?
If you still have some spare money, buy the OPPO 103 (or similar).
MM
There is a tv - and there is a BV
I would imagine the Avant has excellent inbuilt upscaling capabilities for non Blu-ray sources but this is an assumption on my part since I don't own one. I did have the first Sony 4k tv that came out (X9 model) though and that definitely did upscale, and far better than any third party Blu-ray players at that.
Millemissen: If you still have some spare money, buy the OPPO 103 (or similar). MM
My B&O salesman was of the same opinion. He even wanted to sell me one. I've looked at the OPPO, but I think I will stick with a cheaper, but still no cheap one. I willing to pay around 200 € (with 3D).
Still confused with this upscale thing. Will the BR player notice the 4k screen and perform an upscale or will the Avant take care of it anyway?
mawheele: Moxxey - Not sure what is daft. Its simple....
Moxxey - Not sure what is daft. Its simple....
Oh dear. Good luck with your 'simple' theory then. I'm so glad it's so simple and overlooked the theory behind it all. And many thanks for the technology education. I'll pass that to our tech magazines. You should consider writing for us?
Millemissen: If you still have some spare money, buy the OPPO 103 (or similar).
Mine arrived this morning, in preparation for my Avant install tomorrow.
moxxey:Oh dear. Good luck with your 'simple' theory then. I'm so glad it's so simple and overlooked the theory behind it all. And many thanks for the technology education. I'll pass that to our tech magazines. You should consider writing for us?
Breaking news: B&O have asked dealers not to install further Avant's due to "issues with the contrast screen". My installation is off, even though my Avant is with my dealer and installation was scheduled for this morning!
According to my dealer, this B&O message went out last night. So, BV11 it is then.
Quick question, does anybody with an oppo 103 play sky sky though it before it reaches the Avant?
If so thoughts on the results?
Just deciding if its worth buying one or just wait, the next Sky box will be 4k for sure and at a guess the next Apple TV will be (which apparently is due soon).
Thanks